Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now having doubts

Re:Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now ha... by throwawaylinux on Saturday July 08, 2023 @04:45AM (#36642591)

> But then Ronald Reagan (as governor of california) cut state mental illness funding.

> Now clearly mentally ill people - who needed help - were turned away unless they were clearly "a danger to themselves and others".

It's been 50 years between then and now, so... why has no other politician increased it if the funding cut was the problem?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now ha... by bandrami on Saturday July 08, 2023 @05:54AM (#36642923)

Because of a ballot initiative that essentially made it impossible to raise taxes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now ha... by throwawaylinux on Saturday July 08, 2023 @06:42AM (#36643157)

That is not the reason that spending on mental illness can not be increased.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now ha... by bandrami on Saturday July 08, 2023 @07:09AM (#36643308)

I mean, yes it is, unless you have equivalent cuts somewhere else you're willing to make that can get through the legislature.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now ha... by throwawaylinux on Saturday July 08, 2023 @07:26AM (#36643388)

I know what you mean, it's just wrong. Spending on mental health is not tied to tax rates constitutionally such that politicians can't change it. They're probably glad not to change it because misinformed voters think it's still Reagan's fault.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once hailed for decriminalizing drugs, Portugal is now ha... by firesteelrain on Saturday July 08, 2023 @07:26AM (#36643387)

Prop 63 did raise taxes and a budget proposal worth billions is now weaving its way through the legislature. So not true that they couldn’t raise taxes because they did

[ Parent | on HN ]